Callejar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TREHANA CLEMMONS, No. 2:25-cv-01438-TLN-JDP 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MICHELLE CALLEJAR, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On May 30, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 18 were served on Plaintiff Trehana Clemmons (“Plaintiff”) and which contained notice that any 19 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff 20 filed objections on June 16, 2025, and they were considered by the undersigned. 21 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 22 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 23 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 24 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 25 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by…